section 25.1(9)


25.1(9) No public officer is justified in committing an act or omission that would otherwise constitute an offence and that would be likely to result in loss of or serious damage to property, or in directing the commission of an act or omission under subsection (10), unless, in addition to meeting the conditions set out in paragraphs (8)(a) to (c), he or she (a) is personally authorized in writing to commit the act or omission or direct its commission by a senior official who believes on reasonable grounds that committing the act or omission, as compared to the nature of the offence or criminal activity being investigated, is reasonable and proportional in the circumstances, having regard to such matters as the nature of the act or omission, the nature of the investigation and the reasonable availability of other means for carrying out the public officers law enforcement duties; or (b) believes on reasonable grounds that the grounds for obtaining an authorization under paragraph (a) exist but it is not feasible in the circumstances to obtain the authorization and that the act or omission is necessary to (i) preserve the life or safety of any person, (ii) prevent the compromise of the identity of a public officer acting in an undercover capacity, of a confidential informant or of a person acting covertly under the direction and control of a public officer, or (iii) prevent the imminent loss or destruction of evidence of an indictable offence.